1. We have added a Gift Upgrades feature that allows you to gift an account upgrade to another member, just in time for the holiday season. You can see the gift option when going to the Account Upgrades screen, or on any user profile screen.
    Dismiss Notice

Micromanaging - for fun, but optional

Discussion in 'Civ6 - General Discussions' started by AsH2, Mar 26, 2020.

  1. AsH2

    AsH2 Prince

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2002
    Messages:
    466
    Location:
    Sweden
    An unpretentiuosly epic discussion thread in 'general'
    about what (concept/mechanic) in civ6 that may already work and what need to be changed (to keep/make micromanaging fun but optional);
    to serve as inspiration and reference for new threads in 'Civ - Ideas & Suggestions'


    In general I like micromanaging and tend to go both wide and deep when doing it. As there's a lot (of concepts/mechanics) going on in civ6 and I almost enjoy double/tripple checking things every turn, that makes me a really slow single player; but there's no bother.
    Though in MP games you'd rather not spend time on micromanaging, but still there's a mishmash of strategic and tactical decisions/moves to do and some are irreversible - consider path issues and that's no optional micromanaging and no fun.

    I know this is no new issue and I actually have already thought-through-suggestions on how I'd like to deal with it (and other issues, like 1UPT/MUPT - if you'd like to discuss that matter specificly, check 'So, after having played after around 10 games of Civ 6, my conclusion is . . . '), I think there should be an open-minded discussion thread about it in general - you can hide biased conclussions in spoiler.

    TLTR;
    I think there are some interesting mechanics around movement, but the Movement concept (as whole) need to be changed.
    Spoiler divide turns :
    Instead of this mishmash of strategic and tactical decisions/moves in same turn, keep strategy matters (setup) in ordinary turns and (execute) then deal with any conflicting decisions/moves in Tactical/Operational in-between turns to streamline gameplay; (Then also time and map scaling could work well together during events.)

    :wavey: So what else is there?
     
    Last edited: Mar 27, 2020
    hr_oskar likes this.
  2. AsH2

    AsH2 Prince

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2002
    Messages:
    466
    Location:
    Sweden
    To give a positive example..

    I think how the Civic&Tech progressions are shown/handled is almost perfectly - you may or may not engage in focus changes to try get most out of inspiration/eureka boost.
    (Then there could still be reasons for a major Tech Tree Revision.)
     
  3. Victoria

    Victoria Regina Supporter

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2011
    Messages:
    11,503
    How about micro managing overflow loss... you could just have done the mechanic right in the first place but now it’s such a pain. Only those willing to spend the time can shave those precious food and cogs
     
    AsH2 likes this.
  4. dagriggstar

    dagriggstar King

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2006
    Messages:
    626
    Location:
    Adelaide, Australia
    I increasingly feel like the game could do without builders. Like, if your citizen works a tile for say 20 turns, it should automatically get an improvement. Cut out builder micro.....
     
    hr_oskar, AsH2 and acluewithout like this.
  5. Bangau

    Bangau Prince

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2019
    Messages:
    353
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    The Netherlands
    I like this line of thought.
     
  6. AsH2

    AsH2 Prince

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2002
    Messages:
    466
    Location:
    Sweden
    Indeed. In civ4 there were no loss, but now it feels like we're back to civ2.
     
    Victoria likes this.
  7. hr_oskar

    hr_oskar Deity

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2002
    Messages:
    624
    Location:
    Iceland
    Great topic!

    Except back in Civ2 I was too young and naive to be burdened by such complexes. Plus it was so laughably easy even at deity and playing naively.

    Civ4 had so many good things going for it. I hope the designers are still looking at Civ4 for good features and gameplay experiences that could be adapted for future versions.

    I'm all for removing or reducing builders. They're mostly a legacy thing at this point and result in more micro, more opportunity to exploit the AI through war and have an annoying effect on faster game speeds (turns spent moving a bit too consequential).

    Your suggestion would still result in some micromanagement ("Gonna shift my citizens back to working the hills... oh which one was only 4 turns away from getting a mine?") but I guess the point is that it would be optional and not noticed by fast / casual players. Which is better, I agree. It's a bit reminiscent of Civ4's cottages.

    However I think it's really important to have choices in how tiles are improved and I'm not sure how this solution would preserve that.

    What I've imagined is some kind of merger between improvements and districts, so that improvements would be placed in the same way as districts and be built directly by the city itself. Builders would still exist but you'd build fewer of them and their charges could universally be used to advance construction of any district / improvement, wonder and perhaps even district buildings. Their role would therefore be to essentially transfer production from one city (the one that built the builder) to another (the one where the builder adds production).
     
  8. iammaxhailme

    iammaxhailme Emperor

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2015
    Messages:
    1,810
    I was fine with workers in civ 5 because I didn't need to stress out about where to use build charges, but I agree, limited-use builders in civ 6 are annoying, primarily becuase I have to keep having cities produce them.
     
  9. hr_oskar

    hr_oskar Deity

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2002
    Messages:
    624
    Location:
    Iceland
    AI trades needs a serious look. It's the source of some really painful micromanagement at the moment that I don't think any of us enjoys.

    I really dislike the Civ5/6 model of 30 turn deals. If I recall correctly Civ4 had deals that were permanent until canceled or renegotiated. Having to regularly renew friendships, open borders and alliances in Civ6 is purely pointless micro. The 30 turn deal is also the cause of annoying back and forth micro / abuse of gpt rounding, the classic example being Civ5's 1 horse for 1 gpt but 2 for 3 gpt. I really hate trading with the AI at the moment yet it offers too much gold to be ignored for deity level play.

    Yeah I think the quantity is the issue. You constantly need to churn out builders and it gets tedious after a while.
     

Share This Page